R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-13-2007, 12:32 AM   #46
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

Diff heights
The TC5 comes with four available diff heights. This is about 3 too many for me. If I study those pics above I find my drive axle are aiming up hill to the wheel. This is going to cause more outdrive wear and vibration than neccesary, so I plan to raise them up since Associated has provided this option. Handling differences are likely to be on the tiny side so I will reduce wear.
john
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 01:28 AM   #47
Tech Addict
 
RussB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 736
Send a message via MSN to RussB
Default

with regards to the weight of electronics and trying to balance the car... the height of the electronics plays a part in that equation as well. it wouldn't be noticeable on scales since that is just a static left/right measure, but it is there. it all comes down to how in depth you want to get with it, and it seems like you want to get pretty in depth with this.

the sum of the moments in the x, y, and z directions for your components should be equal left to right. most people only balance in the x direction (left and right of the cg) and that's probably fine. but, y (fore and aft of the cg) and z (above or below the cg) would definitely play a factor in the dynamic handling of the car. i would assume that modern race chassis are designed so that all three directions are balanced using a standard 6 cell layout with standard size electronics.

back to my original point... you're not using a standard layout with standard cells so none of that really applies to you. would it be possible to mount the battery further forward in the car and have enough space behind it for the esc?

anyway, i'm rambling here and probably getting my theories wrong

i just eyeball it and leave the thinking cap at work
RussB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 07:49 AM   #48
Tech Elite
 
yyhayyim's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Weston, FL
Posts: 3,424
Trader Rating: 26 (100%+)
Default

Chassis Flex- for a bit more chassis flex, w/o the ITF chassis, some AE FT drivers are cutting the top deck in a few places to make it flex a bit more. They are also using o-rings on the bulkheads, betwwen the bulkheads and the top deck, and screw them down at the 4 corners w/ o-rings in between and this gives the car some flex....Juho Levanen and others have run it this way and it seems to be working, alright...
yyhayyim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 09:40 AM   #49
Tech Elite
 
yyhayyim's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Weston, FL
Posts: 3,424
Trader Rating: 26 (100%+)
Default

...

Last edited by yyhayyim; 05-02-2009 at 06:52 PM.
yyhayyim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 11:42 AM   #50
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

RussB-Thanks for the post. I agree that balancing in the z direction would be nice, but not really possible on this car with a LIPo. There is not enough room to move the liPo forward. Only 2-3 mm of space exist before the batt hits the front bulkhead. Balancing left and right will give me the even forward traction on both sides so that the car accelerates straight. That is my main balancing goal. Slight differences in cornering will go unoticed. I do plan to balance fore and aft. I am not to this point yet. I am adjusting the height of the diffs.

Belt Tension
I will note at this point that the belts are too tight with the diffs low and the cams at their loosest point. With the diff full high the front is OK but still a bit tight on the loosest adjustment. The rear is much better and now there is room to adjust tighter or looser. There was too much driveline friction before I moved the diffs up. You could tell just spinning the car up on the bench. It required too much power to get it started. Hopefully the belts will loosen up. I noticed one guy running a Yokomo BD white front belt on the car. Adjusting the height and belt tension is quite a trial and error pain.

I noticed the belt tension suggestions in the manual. They seem off.


yyhayjim- Notice that my side to side balancing is complete. There is no problem to be solved here. I have a JRXS. The new car is changed some but not much. The short arms did not seem to favor asphalt outdoors. The plastic bulkheads in the rear on mine melted from NiMH battery heat in August. I like very much the cam belt adjustment on the Losi. The centered battery and motor makes balancing easier but you still have a speed control to put somewhere. I love the LCD's. I actually ran the speed control on the opposite side of the motor at the end as the brushless motors stick out farther than the brushed and unbalanced the car, heavier to the left. I also ran the speed control on the top deck for a while looking for cool air. No difference in handling was noticed. My speed control is not near that high now as my battery strap is lowered to fit my thin battery. The main heat producing devices in the Losi are very shrouded up. On the TC5 they are out in the cooling air stream.

I like chopping away at the top deck. Adding a center lightening hole to the left side of the chassis. Cheap to do. I don't care too much for the o rings on a chassis tweak basis.
John

Last edited by John Stranahan; 09-10-2007 at 04:09 PM.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 11:54 AM   #51
Tech Addict
 
J@UNE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 621
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Stranahan View Post
I also ran the speed control on the top deck for a while looking for cool air. No difference in handling was noticed.
Interesting!!! Do you think it would react the same way on high traction track(foam/carpet)?

Specially with the size of the BL esc... Once balance from Left to Right, the Type-R is a bit overweight.

Thx.
J@UNE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 12:27 PM   #52
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

[email protected] don't think that you will notice a difference on the JRXS running the speed control on the top deck. Even on carpet. The top deck is even lower than the old car, I believe. I did find my best balance with the speed control on the opposite side of the motor on the JRXS, on the right side of the chassis down low. There are pics and discussions of these various spots on the Losi LCD thread that I posted a link to in my very first post. I balanced the weight slightly differently for each spot of the speed control. I tried four positions looking for cool air. On that car I also trimmed off a lot of the top deck cross bracing to add flex to the car which was extremely stiff. If you have a 53 ounce car with 14 ounces of NiMH down low then the weight and height of the speed control becomes less of a concern.
john

Last edited by John Stranahan; 08-13-2007 at 01:04 PM.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 12:30 PM   #53
Tech Elite
 
yyhayyim's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Weston, FL
Posts: 3,424
Trader Rating: 26 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Stranahan View Post
The new car is changed some but not much. The short arms did not seem to favor asphalt outdoors. The plastic bulkheads in the rear on mine melted from NiMH battery heat in August. I like very much the cam belt adjustment on the Losi. The centered battery and motor makes balancing easier but you still have a speed control to put somewhere. I love the LCD's. I actually ran the speed control on the opposite side of the motor at the end as the brushless motors stick out farther than the brushed and unbalanced the car, heavier to the left. I also ran the speed control on the top deck for a while looking for cool air. No difference in handling was noticed. My speed control is not near that high now as my battery strap is lowered to fit my thin battery. The main heat producing devices in the Losi are very shrouded up. On the TC5 they are out in the cooling air stream
On the new car, the arms are longer, and better for aphalt. They are an improvement over the old JRX-S on that reguard.

The weight balance and distribution has improved since the motor is now rear mounted, for better balance and weight transfer and improved handling. The rear part of the chassis has a huge cut out directly under the motor, a space bigger than any TC...its big, and allows increased amount of airflow for improved cooling on that side...also, you can mount up to 3 fans on the rear motor mount/bulkheads, neatly and nicely looking, for even better cooling action. This combo should keep the motor cooler in that heat, than a side motor set-up like the common belt driven TC's of today, like the TC5.

Diff access and set up is much easier on the Type R than the TC5...amonst other things. Parts are much more readily available for the Type R.

LCD's...you cant overlook that...I think that in that heat every little help you can get will help, and the smoothness and less friction of the Type R drivetrain will give you a bit better efficiency and possibly cooler running temp.

The only thing left is the ESC...you can mount it on the side....T. Hodge recommends the right side towards the front for brushless esc. It will get the airflow you talk about if its set up like that from the side. You can mount it on top deck, also, and get even better balance if needed...you can then open a hole in the front windshield like nitro drivers have to do for better cooling on that ESC, if needed.

It just seems like a bit better option to test considering all those factors and your needs. Maybe we test this in the future...we have very similar conditions here in south florida...yesterday we had 106F temp w/ humidity and track temp was close to 130F...it was bad...a light occasional breeze was all we got...I'll see if I can get my hands on a Type R and do some testing, again...I had one about 3 months ago and sold it to get the Mi3. Ran it a couple of times and I did very well on asphalt...nice traction, but the best was the way it handled...like a pan car changing directions L/R...it some time to get used to.

What body were you using again on the TC5?

And please do not missunderstand me...I'm not saying the TC5 is bad choice...I was trying to see the reasoning behind your picking the TC5 and try and help you if you were not set on just that car...I hope you do well.
yyhayyim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 12:42 PM   #54
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

YYhayim -I can't believe you don't like my new car already and I have not even run it yet. It is not really the point of this thread to convert someone to your favorite brand of TC. It is more a setup aid for the TC you own. Here is pic of the Losi with good side to side balance.
I am actually upset that my JRXS became antique after only a few months. The first car was not really ready for release.

Dodge stratus 3.0 for now. It was on the shelf.
john
Attached Thumbnails
Associated Factory Team TC5, Brushless, LiPo, Li-ion Nanophosphate, Tips and Tricks-9-novak-gtb-6.5-right-side-install-016-resized.jpg  

Last edited by John Stranahan; 08-13-2007 at 12:56 PM.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 01:23 PM   #55
Tech Elite
 
yyhayyim's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Weston, FL
Posts: 3,424
Trader Rating: 26 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Stranahan View Post
YYhayim -I can't believe you don't like my new car already and I have not even run it yet. It is not really the point of this thread to convert someone to your favorite brand of TC. It is more a setup aid for the TC you own. Here is pic of the Losi with good side to side balance.
I am actually upset that my JRXS became antique after only a few months. The first car was not really ready for release.

Dodge stratus 3.0 for now. It was on the shelf.
john
Not at all John...if you look at the end of my last post I actually try to make it known that I'm just trying to understand what your goals are why the choice of the TC5 over other cars...maybe you just saw one running a few weeks ago and you went along with that. You are a very smart guy, and on your pan car threads you show to be very methodical and precise and have good reason behind your choices...pantoura, over speed merchant, etc...Just curius if you evaluated the TC's in the market today and after analyzing them, you chose the best one suited for what your needs are went along with that after carefu study...just interested in your thought process...that all...not trying to convert you...My favorite company is Xray...I'm just trying out an Mi3 for now to get an idea as to what it can do, plus the the local support is great as well as parts, for us in FL.

I hope you do well with the TC5 and your set up, and I'm sure new things will come up and you'll set up things differently down the road in your testing seesions looking for the best set up to accomplish your goals... You know what you're doing and you're not a rookie to TCs. I'm sure you'll do fine and be very happy with the TC5 awesome speed and handling...You will hit over 50mph easily, every lap at your track....nitro TC will not have a chance...the only challenge will be the 1/8th scalers...it will be fun. I hope you have some speed gun and lap timing system to clock times and speeds to get some idea how things are performing.

This set-up should help you easily convince you that today's TCs and BL and Lipo's will get you those 50mph plus speeds you had trouble beliveing were consistently possible.
yyhayyim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 02:25 PM   #56
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

Well I will tell you what my favorite TC would be: but it does not exist. It would have a molded chassis, and motor positiion just Like a Losi XXXS. This chassis was absolutely durable and tweak free unlike these double plate chassis that waller out in a few months. This would make it less expensive to run, but more expensive to start up production by needing a quality mold. It would have the same dual belt arrangement like a TC5 and others, but enclosed like the XXXS. This would protect the gears and diffs outdoors from tiny rocks and dirt. What a pleasure that was. It would not have swept back front arms and dogbones and a single belt like a XXXS that killed its performance with stock motors. It would have a straight out like the TC5 or forward swept bone like a yokomo MR4TCSP. The swept back bones on the XXXS caused A-arm lift and reduced traction with stock motors. It adds stability for mod. The swept forward bones add a little traction. I personally think a XXXS is still very competive in mod, not so much for stock motors.
I don't pick my cars as the best of the breed, I pick them much like I do my full size cars. I don't change them very often due to the high cost.

What I still have trouble believing is that they will go that speed and not thermal before 5 minutes. We will see.

Diff Heights
I ended up using the medium height cam holders in the diffs. In the front teeth down, all the way loose. In the back teeth up second notch from all the way loose. The drive train seems almost free enough now. This gave me the best or almost horizontal dogbone angles at a 6.5 mm ride height. We may have some bumps so I am running the car a little on the high side.
john

Last edited by John Stranahan; 08-13-2007 at 02:41 PM.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 02:49 PM   #57
Tech Addict
 
RussB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 736
Send a message via MSN to RussB
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Stranahan View Post
Well I will tell you what my favorite TC would be: but it does not exist. It would have a molded chassis, and motor positiion just Like a Losi XXXS. This chassis was absolutely durable and tweak free unlike these double plate chassis that waller out in a few months. This would make it less expensive to run, but more expensive to start up production by needing a quality mold. It would have the same dual belt arrangement like a TC5 and others, but enclosed like the XXXS. This would protect the gears and diffs outdoors from tiny rocks and dirt. What a pleasure that was. It would not have swept back front arms and dogbones and a single belt like a XXXS that killed its performance with stock motors. It would have a straight out like the TC5 or forward swept bone like a yokomo MR4TCSP. The swept back bones on the XXXS caused A-arm lift and reduced traction with stock motors. It adds stability for mod. The swept forward bones add a little traction. I personally think a XXXS is still very competive in mod, not so much for stock motors.
that's almost an mr4-tc, which ironically was the first sedan to use the layout that is now pretty much standard, almost 10 years later.
RussB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 03:01 PM   #58
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

Russ- Except for the tweak resistant molded chassis and sealed drivetrain.

Corner Weights

This is the setup I use for the final balancing. It gives me corner weights or the weight of each corner of the car. So here is the 5 minute procedure.

you already know that side to side weights are good at this point. you only need to move weight forward or backward if neccesary.

Put front wheels on the balance, rear wheels on a shim stack the height of the balance. Use the spring collars to adjust the preload so that the balances read equal. Screw down on the light wheel up on the heavy wheel. Do the opposite corner the same way. Now reverse the car. If the weight is right, the balances will still read equal. By adjusting the fronts you have set the cross corner weights equal. By chance mine was in perfect balance. (with .2-.3 ounces). Shock friction will cause a little error. These one o-ringed shocks seem to have very low friction. I can tell when I bounce the car and read the scales. They return well.

Once this is done you can reset cross corner weights to equal at the track once a session using an MIP Tweak Station. I will post a pic later. You cannot use the tweak station as well to adjust this weight fore and aft but the procedure would be the same. Do the front. Reverse the car. If it is now not equal you need to move weight. There are plenty of RC guys that don't do either of these two last steps but the full size car guys do this, so I do as well. It makes the car corner the same left as right.

Now for a rear roll center adjustment and I will be ready to test.

john
Attached Thumbnails
Associated Factory Team TC5, Brushless, LiPo, Li-ion Nanophosphate, Tips and Tricks-corner-weights-resized.jpg  

Last edited by John Stranahan; 08-15-2007 at 08:54 PM.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 03:21 PM   #59
Tech Elite
 
yyhayyim's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Weston, FL
Posts: 3,424
Trader Rating: 26 (100%+)
Default

Looking good. What are your droop settings? The lighter weight might require a bit more droop than the set-ups sheets show from drivers running heavy 5-6cell nimh...also, are you planning to use roll bars? You mentioned you had a bumpy track, how are you planning to deal w/ possible bump steer settings?
yyhayyim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2007, 03:44 PM   #60
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

Droop is set at maximum for the moment. Just enough so that the springs don't get loose at full droop. I adjust this more at the track after my roll stiffness is corrected. Bump steer will need to be corrected. I'l make a post after I do so. Roll stiffness will have to be adjusted. I don't plan to use sway bars to adjust roll stiffness exept as a temporary measure if I find I don't have the proper spring or spring hole position. Swaybars increase lateral weight transfer over what you would get by just increasing your spring tension and roll centers to limit roll. They are more useful for bigger heavier cars to limit roll when heavier springs would be too stiff to accomodate the bumps.

John

Last edited by John Stranahan; 08-13-2007 at 04:58 PM.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pantoura, 1/10 Pan Car, 2S LiPo, Brushless, Tips and Tricks. John Stranahan Electric On-Road 2178 12-01-2010 11:26 AM
BRUSHLESS rc18t factory team with lipo dub599 R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 11 06-16-2008 12:14 AM
Factory team B4 Novak brushless with lipo PTP Racing R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 1 12-13-2007 11:36 PM
Factory Team RC18T with hopups and brushless / lipo setup! Cain R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 5 11-26-2007 05:35 PM
Xray T2R, 2100 mah 2c LiPo, and Mabuchi power: Tech tips and Tricks gacjr0 Electric On-Road 46 11-18-2007 10:09 AM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 06:01 PM.


Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net